ReviewFrontiers in plant science2018
Policy and Governance Perspectives for Regulation of Genome Edited Crops in the United States.
Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genome editing and food safety: bridging the validation gap.NPJ science of food · 2026Review
- Beyond GMOs: transgene-free gene-edited crops for global food security.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Review
- Engaging U.S. experts in environmental oversight of GE crops as it relates to novel biotechnologies.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Advancing nutritional quality in oilseed crops through genome editing: a comprehensive review.GM crops & food · 2025Review
- High-level production of health-beneficial glucoraphanin by multiplex editing of AOP2 gene family in mustard.Plant biotechnology journal · 2025Article
- Recent developments, challenges and opportunities in genome editing for crop science from a societal perspective.Frontiers in genome editing · 2025Review
- Crop bioengineering via gene editing: reshaping the future of agriculture.Plant cell reports · 2024Review
- A comparative analysis of attitudes toward genome-edited food among Japanese public and scientific community.PloS one · 2024Article
- Review
- Paraguay's approach to biotechnology governance: a comprehensive guide.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Putting CRISPR-Cas system in action: a golden window for efficient and precise genome editing for crop improvement.GM crops & food · 2023Review
- Processes for regulating genetically modified and gene edited plants.GM crops & food · 2023Review
- 3Bs of CRISPR-Cas mediated genome editing in plants: exploring the basics, bioinformatics and biosafety landscape.Physiology and molecular biology of plants : an international journal of functional plant biology · 2023Review
- Targeted editing of multiple homologues of GTR1 and GTR2 genes provides the ideal low-seed, high-leaf glucosinolate oilseed mustard with uncompromised defence and yield.Plant biotechnology journal · 2023Article
- GMOs or non-GMOs? The CRISPR Conundrum.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Review
- The COVID misinfodemic: not new, never more lethal.Trends in microbiology · 2022Review
- Synergism of endophyticFrontiers in plant science · 2022Article
- Exploring and exploiting cuticle biosynthesis for abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in wheat and barley.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Review
- Data challenges for future plant gene editing: expert opinion.Transgenic research · 2021Article
- An Outlook on Global Regulatory Landscape for Genome-Edited Crops.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genome editing for crop improvement lies at the leading edge of disruptive bioengineering technologies that will challenge existing regulatory paradigms for products of biotechnology and which will elicit widespread public interest. Regulation of products of biotechnology through the US Coordinated Framework for Biotechnology is predicated on requiring burden of proof that regulation is warranted. Although driven by considerations of newly emerging processes for product development, regulation has, for the most part, focused on characteristics of the biotechnology product itself and not the process used for its development
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.